Staff at Immigration Centre Suspended for Abusing Detainees

Nine workers at Brook House Immigration Detention Centre have been suspended amid claims that they mocked, assaulted and abuse detainees. This information came to light following an investigation carried out by the TV show Panorama.

G4S said that while they have not been provided with the recorded evidence, they have began an investigation.

The company has attracted controversy and complaints for many years, and has been embroiled in allegations of fraud and systematic failure to properly carry out their role of proving security; while at the same time describing themselves as the world’s leading provider of security solutions.

An ongoing investigations against G4S by the Serious Fraud Office investigation commenced in 2013, when a ban was imposed on both G4S and a second company, Serco, bidding for any government work. The ban was lifted in 2014 when G4S agreed to repay £109m and put in place a corporate to prevent any recurrence.

London’s Mayor, Sadiq Khan, said “We can’t go on with scandal after scandal, where the public’s money is being squandered and the quality of what’s delivered isn’t up to scratch. The government is too reliant on a cosy group of big companies. The public are rightly getting fed up to the back teeth of big companies making huge profits out of the taxpayer, which smacks to them of rewards for failure.”.

It is time to consider crafting of a takeover contingency plan for the state to take responsibility of those in detention, ahead of their being deported, or in the instance of a criminal case, those either convicted or if they are just awaiting trial.

Handing the work to private firms after a competitive tendering process where the cheapest wins, would be of questionable morality, and could lead to a lower rate service falling below standards.

Concerns were raised in the latest Brook House Immigration Centre inspection, which revealed that some detainees had been held there for over two years. The inspectors highlighted issues with the “stark and impersonal” residential units and unsatisfactory sanitary facilities.